Posts made by DeviantScripter

@cystic:

Maybe the correct phrasing would be "Americans will have Saddam killed/arrested/assassinated and will work with the UN to insure that a democratic process is involved in electing the next leader of Iraq (to ultimately be destroyed by the Iraqi military/assassinated by the US for not falling in line with American policy etc).

Do you think it’s just the American’s that find Saddam undesirable and view him as an extreme threat? C’mon, don’t be so naive. We’re just the only country with the balls to do something about it.

You’re absolutely correct. If we don’t like who the democracy votes into office (example: the leader makes bad decisions, and poses a threat through the use of biological, nuclear, chemical and/or terrorist connections.) we probably will take him out of office, but I don’t think it will come to that point. The situation will be similar to Afganhistan, in which the US appoints a leader that is acceptable with all parties involved. Hopefully this will serve as an example to other dictators, and hopefully they’ll make wiser decisions in the future.

@F_alk:

What about guns ?

What about them?

The bigger threat that China poses is the fact that they’re in bed with Russia. (Figuratively, of course.) They readily trade nuclear weapons and technology.

China’s biggest companies funded the Taliban network in Afganhistan and continue to support Saddam’s regime in Iraq. They’ve got their hands in every cookiejar and this poses a potentially bigger threat than an all-out confrontation.

@Anonymous:

@Deviant:Scripter:

If everything goes as planned, we’ll replace Saddam with a more democratic leader, and hopefully bring their country out of the crap-hole they’re in now.

There exists a plan for a post-saddam era ???
That’s news to me!

Last time I checked, we haven’t started attacking Iraq yet, have we?

@Yanni:

May I quote

Quote:
we’ll replace Saddam with a more democratic leader

……

…

…

very democratic

I don’t understand.

When I say “we”, I’m referring to us Americans.

@Yanni:

But seriously, Space could work.

Launching garbage into space still costs too much. Unless of course you can stow it away on some piece of shit Russian spacecraft. :wink:

@Cystic:

Damn i keep thinking you’re TM with that duck.

LoL. Lack of options, I guess. :)

Yes, but I don’t agree with your use of “invading their country.” Granted, we will enter their country to remove Saddam, our mission is not to take them over. If everything goes as planned, we’ll replace Saddam with a more democratic leader, and hopefully bring their country out of the crap-hole they’re in now.

Yes, I do believe we will eventually come into conflict with China.

China is aggressively growing it’s military might, and could pose a threat in the distant future. (Not soon by any means.) They are one of a handful of countries that has the potential to launch ICBM missiles at North America, and that alone is something to worry about. Although we’d nuke their ass if they did, they still pose a threat as they gain more advanced technology.

However, I think that we’ll see a conflict between China and Taiwan long before a conflict with the United States. (Although a conflict with Taiwan could potentially bring the United States into a battle.)

China’s military is pretty much a joke in comparison to some of it’s adversaries. Although it’s the largest in the world with over 2 million people, it severly lacks technology, equipment, and training. I would hope for China’s sake that they didn’t get the balls to launch an offensive against anyone.

@Yanni:

Saddam has not intentionally starved thousands of his people. There is no proof at all, you watch too much TV.

Ok Mom. :lol:

For once, I actually agree with Yanni!

To put it bluntly, we cannot continue on the track we’re on. There is no way that we can continue to be a powerful country, yet still be held at the whim of Middle-Eastern countries for which we rely on for oil.

The only problems that I see are in the transition from gas to electrical power. First, I don’t see how the government will get away with outlawing all gasoline cars. (Unless of course the EPA mandates it.) In theory it sounds wonderul, and will likely benefit our country in the end.

@Yanni:

The Nuclear waste will have to be disposed of, but isn’t that what Canada’s for?

LoL. :lol:

@Yanny:

Or, I’ll give you a choice. You can either prove it to me, or tell me you will shoot yourself, with your own gun, every single innocent that dies when we attack Iraq.

What sense does that make? Our troops are not going into Iraq with the intention of killing innocent civilians. Let me answer this with a question. In the long run, which do you think will cost more lives. A stray precision-guided bomb and some misplaced bullets, or Saddam’s purposeful starvation of thousands and thousands of people? (Plus the use of his chemical and biological weapons in the future.) In my opinion, we’re justified in saving the lives of thousands of people. You anti-attack-iraq advocates need to think long-term.

Yea, and the German’s weren’t killing Jews during World War II…:roll: Look how many lives were lost when we waited for die-hard proof on that…

@Yanni:

I only seem extremely left because those who argue with me in this forum are extremely right.

And damn proud of it… :wink:

@Yanny:

And there still is zero proof of Saddam doing any of that. It is all speculation.

It is NOT speculation! Have you heard what the chief UN weapons inspector said as he was coming out of Iraq?

Yanni, do you believe African-American’s should be compensated for being our slaves for so many years?

@F_alk:

I still don’t understand how the “immorality” of two consenting adults “affect me everyday”.
Can you explain that claim of yours?

Sure, I can explain it for you. :) You see, immorality such as sex before marriage and divorce, lead to destructive lifestyles for the child. It has been proven (through MANY studies) that children from single parent families are more likely to enter a life of crime. I don’t think I need to explain to you how an increase in crime can affect your everyday life…

@FinsterniS:

Well if nobody had guns it would be more safe it is not a question of individual right but of collectivity, i would’nt want to live in a society with lots of handgun.

FinsterniS, that’s like saying “If everybody shared everything equally, we wouldn’t need money.” Sure, theoretically it sounds perfect. That’s not how the world works though. Let’s think about this for a second. Let’s say, for the sake of conversation, that you made gun’s illegal. The criminals are still going to get the gun’s (regardless of what the law says) and now you have nothing to protect yourself or your property except a phone call to 911. I’d rather not put my life in the hand’s of a 5 minute response time, thank you very much.

Now, let’s look at the reason for actually allowing gun’s to be legal in America. Your right to own a gun was put into the constitution to (believe it or not) regulate the government! If the government was to become too oppressive and corrupt, beyond the point of being able to vote out bad politicians, it was up to the citizens to overthrow the government and establish one for the people. Sure, presently, it might be pretty crazy to think that the citizens could overthrow the government. They have the most advanced weapons, and the strongest military. (So just becuase Bill Clinton is a disgrace, it doesn’t mean we can “shoot” him out of office. :wink: )

The more realistic reason for owning guns, however, is that for many people it’s their only means of acquiring food. Many people hunt for their own food, and owning a gun is a huge part of that.

I think you’ve got the right idea Jazz. I’d also like to add, that in my opinion, the reason that a lot of countries are able to criticize America so harshly is because they don’t carry the burden of actually having to address issues that are expected of a superpower.

@Yanny:

The Real problem is our treatment of the innocent people, for two things, Oil and Votes.

Name for me a Strategic Objective outside of oil that our nation solves by attacking Iraq. Don’t mention a Humanitarian Issue, there are far worse places. Don’t mention Israel, they can take care of themselves.

It won’t be a perfect victory with little loss of life this time. We aren’t as militarily strong as we were at the start of the Gulf War. We don’t have the scores of nations backing us up. Thousands will die, to help Bush’s 2004 campaign.

First, there is a strategic objective to taking out the chemical, biological, and possibly even nuclear threat that Saddam possesses. There is proof that he has distributed these weapons to any terrorist group that has the cash.

Secondly, I only agree with the second part of your comments about our military. Yes, Clinton screwed America over when he cut our military so much. (He wouldn’t have been able to launch a Gulf War type campaign if he wanted too.) Militarily wise, we don’t need the scores of nations backing us up. I do think that our military is perfectly strong enough to combat the brittle army that Saddam possesses.

@Yanny:

Boy Scouts are incredible Secular. I’m sorry I got so pissed, but the Boy Scouts have been an increasing problem for me. The leaders in my troop are 100% incredible conservative hardcore Catholics. I mean fanatics. My Parents are offical Catholics, though not hardcore ones. This makes them think I am Catholic. So, I am not forfilling my Boy Scout Religious Duties by not going to Church on Sundays. And they won’t advance me in rank because of it.

No offense, but do Boy Scouts really matter? If they piss you off so much, why don’t you just quit. Sounds like a raw deal to me…

@yourbuttocks:

Say it sister!

LOL :D

@F_alk:

So, you are against the right to own a gun then? …. would only be logical

No, actually I’m FOR owning guns. With the proper training and education, owning a gun can be a completely safe situation. However, you didn’t answer my question…“If I stole millions of dollars from a corporation, that doesn’t affect public safety either…should I be allowed to do that?” Whether the crime affects public safety is certainly a consideration into the legality of the offense, but not neccessarily the only deciding factor.

@F__alk:

@Deviant:Scripter:

@Yanny:

And I would say, your American Goverment has killed it’s own, indiginous, people. It has used Chemical, Biological, and Nuclear weapons. Your country just has bigger guns and can rule through force.

No, our country rules through smart decisions that benefit it’s people. Unlike Saddam, who rules through personal decisions that further his own political status.

@Yanny:

Oh, so if Congress decides to commit genocide, its OK.

@Deviant:Scripter:

Where is that coming from? I fail to see the correlation between the two. Why are you taking the decisions of our country to such extremes as genocide?

You replied that your country rules through smart decisions, when Yanny mentioned the american genocide.
And now you complain that there is no correlation?
Why did you post you message in the first place then, if you can’t see a correlation.
You called the genocide a “smart decision” …. that’s the reason for Yannies second posting…

just another one to add to my shouting at you. I will apologize for the shouting in the other thread if you promise to read postings more carefully :)

Hehe, don’t worry about it F_alk, I can take the pressure… :wink:

@Yanny:

My point is our country is too quick to yell at others for minor Genocide that is occuring everywhere. Normally, I would support this, but theres one problem. We never even mention the millions of our own people that we have killed. How about a national day of mourning for the Indians? All we do are grant them land in some of the worst places in the country. And forget about them.

Oh geez, I knew someone was going to play the Indian card. Maybe we should clarify the position of Native Americans. Unlike other minority groups (such as Latinos and blacks), American Indians are considered (by our Federal government) to be a political group. This means that they are treated as such. Now, please explain to me why we owe the Indians anything…? When we fought the Indians off of their land, they were our enemy. Do we have a national day of mourning for Hiroshima? How about Nagasaki? Having a national day of mourning for our former enemies doesn’t make any sense. :-?